Case 3313369/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Elahi v AAqua Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3313369/2022
- Decision date
- 13 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Elahi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal found that Aaqua Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr A Elahi's wages and ordered it to pay the gross sum of £14,583.34, calculated as £175,000 divided by 12, subject to any lawfully required PAYE deductions and without any other deduction or set off.
The tribunal found that Mr Elahi was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It ordered damages of £8,689.29, described as equivalent to one month's net pay, to be paid without deduction.
The tribunal dismissed the claim for a redundancy payment because Mr Elahi had not been employed long enough. It also made no award for alleged pension losses, recording that it was not satisfied the contract was clear enough for either a breach of contract damages award or an unauthorised deduction from wages award concerning alleged non-payment of pension contributions.
The tribunal found that Aaqua Ltd failed to pay Mr Elahi's holiday entitlement in accordance with the Working Time Regulations 1998 and ordered payment of £1,570.52. The total of the monetary awards stated in the judgment is £24,843.15.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages award stated as a gross sum, subject to any lawfully required PAYE deductions and without any other deduction or set off. | Upheld | — | £14,583 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, with damages equivalent to one month's net pay. | Upheld | — | £8,689 |
| Redundancy | The claimant was not entitled to a redundancy payment because he was not employed long enough. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | No award was made for alleged pension losses because the tribunal was not satisfied the contract was clear enough for an unauthorised deduction from wages award in relation to alleged non-payment of pension contributions. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | No award was made for alleged pension losses because the tribunal was not satisfied the contract was clear enough for a damages for breach of contract award in relation to alleged non-payment of pension contributions. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £24,843
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 - Rule 21
- Working Time Regulations 1998
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.